The Ace wrote:There's always a risk that a persons actions could have a negative impact on others, but that doesn't mean that their freedoms get curbed because of it. People seem a bit too happy to be living under this authoritarianism. That's very worrying.

The Ace wrote:There's always a risk that a persons actions could have a negative impact on others, but that doesn't mean that their freedoms get curbed because of it. People seem a bit too happy to be living under this authoritarianism. That's very worrying.

The Ace wrote:There's always a risk that a persons actions could have a negative impact on others, but that doesn't mean that their freedoms get curbed because of it. People seem a bit too happy to be living under this authoritarianism. That's very worrying.

Yes. The freedom to spread Covid 19 and kill lots of people.

It is similar to the mentality with Republicans in America. "I have the freedom to buy a gun and shoot people with it. It"s in the constitution!"

I’m sorry you feel people shouldn’t have rights. I’m sure you are loving having the government telling you how to live your life.

Of all the conspiracy theories out there, this one about the government trying to keep us at home to control us is one of the most moronic.

What do people think the government stand to gain from it? They're destroying the economy, losing out financially and for what? So people can stay at home. The government wants people out, spending money, paying taxed. Not at home being furloughed.

So, what, Ebdon and his ilk think what? The government is losing money hand over fist because it wants us to stay at home? What in the hell do you think they'd benefit from that?

A proper criticism would be to ask why they're trying to send public schoolkids back in June, but private schoolkids get until September. Instead, we get a lot of people who don't know what proper opression is, moaning that for a couple of months they can't go for a pint or get their hair done.

SnookerFan wrote:Of all the conspiracy theories out there, this one about the government trying to keep us at home to control us is one of the most moronic.

What do people think the government stand to gain from it? They're destroying the economy, losing out financially and for what? So people can stay at home. The government wants people out, spending money, paying taxed. Not at home being furloughed.

So, what, Ebdon and his ilk think what? The government is losing money hand over fist because it wants us to stay at home? What in the hell do you think they'd benefit from that?

A proper criticism would be to ask why they're trying to send public schoolkids back in June, but private schoolkids get until September. Instead, we get a lot of people who don't know what proper opression is, moaning that for a couple of months they can't go for a pint or get their hair done.

It's pathetic.

Wait a minute. Are you saying Ebdon and Ace are not experts on virology and politics?

The Ace wrote:There's always a risk that a persons actions could have a negative impact on others, but that doesn't mean that their freedoms get curbed because of it. People seem a bit too happy to be living under this authoritarianism. That's very worrying.

Under authoritarianism we wouldn’t be allowed to have this conversation.

What are the freedoms that you’re so desperate to exercise, exactly? And why do you think an entire planet of disparate governments with conflicting political mindsets are doing pretty much the same thing when it’s bound to negatively impact them both politically and economically? There’s no more surefire way to lose power in your country than to increase unemployment.

Subservience is all well and good but we’re not being subservient to them, are we? We’re doing what needs to be done to save lives. Do you consider following the law to be subservience too?

We’re doing what we’re told saves lives, that much is certain. As to the question surrounding which freedoms I would like to exercise, well whatever I damned well please, to put it bluntly. The government has no business telling me when and how often I can leave my house, or infringe upon my right to be able to earn a living.

SnookerFan wrote:Of all the conspiracy theories out there, this one about the government trying to keep us at home to control us is one of the most moronic.

What do people think the government stand to gain from it? They're destroying the economy, losing out financially and for what? So people can stay at home. The government wants people out, spending money, paying taxed. Not at home being furloughed.

So, what, Ebdon and his ilk think what? The government is losing money hand over fist because it wants us to stay at home? What in the hell do you think they'd benefit from that?

A proper criticism would be to ask why they're trying to send public schoolkids back in June, but private schoolkids get until September. Instead, we get a lot of people who don't know what proper opression is, moaning that for a couple of months they can't go for a pint or get their hair done.

No. I think people need to do what they think is best for themselves, as individuals. The only selfish people are the ones who are forcing other people to go along with their particular word view.

You are talking out of your bottom, and will be treated as such until you explain;

1) What you think the government is gaining from all of this. Saying subservience is not an answer. The government, not just in this country, but in countries across the world will be destroying their economy and losing millions if not billions. Why the hell would they do this just to make people stay at home? Do you really think they'd sacrifice that much just because they get some enjoyment out of people doing something inconvenient for a few months? You really think the government, in every country in the world, would agree something like this, just to annoy you? What the hell benefit is it to the government to have people staying at home when it's ruining them financially?

2) How the hell you think the leaders of every country in the world have agreed to go along with this. This isn't something just happening in the UK. It's international. Countries who are not allies have come together to agree to do this, have they? You're essentially saying that every country in the world has put all differences aside, essentially creating World Peace, in an attempt to make everybody in the world stay at home. How do you think all of that went down, and why do you think people not being allowed out of their houses is so important to literally the whole world, that they'd put aside everything else to achieve it?

Have you got any real answers, or are you just; "Oh waaah! I want to leave my home"?

I’ve never actually said this was some worldwide conspiracy theory, so please don’t put words into my mouth. All I’ve said is that governments all over the world will take advantage of a situation if it means expanding the size and power of the state, that’s just what they do. Do you really not see how the economy tanking will help the governments position? It means they will have to either increase taxes, print more money, or borrow, likely all of the above. This leads to an increased amount of people relying on the government

HustleKing wrote:I would just like to say I also heavily disagree with Ace, to help banish the thought that there's anyone on this forum that agrees with this silt.

Hopefully all the other regulars show their disagreement too and highlight how stupid that opinion is

I take no issue with disagreements. What I do take issue with is people who try to force others to behave like they do by using force. It’s certainly not me who is doing that, but I think a few others here should take a long hard look in a mirror.

The Ace wrote:I’ve never actually said this was some worldwide conspiracy theory, so please don’t put words into my mouth. All I’ve said is that governments all over the world will take advantage of a situation if it means expanding the size and power of the state, that’s just what they do. Do you really not see how the economy tanking will help the governments position? It means they will have to either increase taxes, print more money, or borrow, likely all of the above. This leads to an increased amount of people relying on the government

This makes no sense at all, though. How many governments can you name whose positions have been strengthened by tanking their own economy? Why don’t all governments do this all the time, then?

Also, our government actively resisted shutting down for as long as possible, initially relying on herd immunity until it became clear that wasn’t a viable option. Why would they resist if they thought a lockdown would strengthen their position? How many people do you know who have more faith in the government because of how they’ve handled this?

Increasing taxes will make them deeply unpopular, printing more money without the economy growing at the same rate would lead to inflation, and borrowing will weaken their position in world politics. None of them is a good thing for the government to have to do.

The Ace wrote:I take no issue with disagreements. What I do take issue with is people who try to force others to behave like they do by using force. It’s certainly not me who is doing that, but I think a few others here should take a long hard look in a mirror.

It will be your own ropes with which you hang.

What force? You got somebody outside your front door preventing you from leaving, have you?

The Ace wrote:I take no issue with disagreements. What I do take issue with is people who try to force others to behave like they do by using force. It’s certainly not me who is doing that, but I think a few others here should take a long hard look in a mirror.

It will be your own ropes with which you hang.

What force? You got somebody outside your front door preventing you from leaving, have you?

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Iranu and Vodkadiet having a go at a volunteer NHS worker.

I should point out that the NHS Volunteer is 'Acé', and not 'theace' who is posting here.

I don't know for sure that 'theace' is not an NHS volunteer (it would enable him to leave the house without being pounced on by the authorities) but I don't think we should tar the wrong people with the same brush. I would like to think that as an NHS volunteer, Acé has different views to these.

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Iranu and Vodkadiet having a go at a volunteer NHS worker.

I should point out that the NHS Volunteer is 'Acé', and not 'theace' who is posting here.

I don't know for sure that 'theace' is not an NHS volunteer (it would enable him to leave the house without being pounced on by the authorities) but I don't think we should tar the wrong people with the same brush. I would like to think that as an NHS volunteer, Acé has different views to these.

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Iranu and Vodkadiet having a go at a volunteer NHS worker.

I should point out that the NHS Volunteer is 'Acé', and not 'theace' who is posting here.

I don't know for sure that 'theace' is not an NHS volunteer (it would enable him to leave the house without being pounced on by the authorities) but I don't think we should tar the wrong people with the same brush. I would like to think that as an NHS volunteer, Acé has different views to these.

Now, with that said : seconds out...round nine

Shouldn't go at the worker, but at the system.

Good point Jester - it is Ace' who is supporting the NHS. The Ace is a different poster